Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I reckon it's because the situation of today are more complex than it was in the past. Rioting coal miners in the 1870s and 1930s, and Civil Rights marches in the 60s South, were pretty damned straightforward. It was pretty easy to understand what the deal was and why it was wrong.
Nowadays you practically have to have a dual BS degree in PoliSci and Economics to halfway understand what the Big Boys have been up to and how they've been screwing everyone over. At least the protesters realize that something is terribly rotten, even though they can't articulate that 'something' to the American people. Which is their main problem: their not having found a way to effectively articulate the situation to everyone else.
"In the United States today, we have the most unequal distribution of wealth and income since the 1920s. Today, the wealthiest 400 individuals own more wealth than the bottom half of America -- 150 million people.
Today, the six heirs to the Walmart fortune own as much wealth as the bottom 30 percent.
Today, the top 1 percent own 40 percent of all wealth, while the bottom 60 percent owns 2 percent.
Incredibly, the bottom 40 percent of all Americans own just 0.3 percent of the wealth of the country."
Every America has a right to voice their anger, it doesn't matter if I agree with them (as is the case with the Tea Party). Disagreeing with a group of protesters, doesn't give the Man the right to beat them.
What have you added to the thread? Care to elaborate?
With one hell of a lot less words than you have, and with about as much useful information.
Friend, it's VERY obvious that despite coming on here and portraying yourself as relatively neutral to both involved parties, that you in fact have an agenda. It's plain to all with a brain and two eyes to read with.
You are easily spotted from miles away. You make your thread, and then rather than having a civil point-counterpoint discussion, you vehemently disagree with anyone who doesn't see things as you do.
As for your maintaining that you had a job on Wall Street and therefore are duly qualified to comment on the underground corruption.....that's tantamount to me saying I worked as a janitor on the ground floor of the World Trade Center from 1990-2001....and as a result, I can espouse finite details as to who was really behind the bombings.
With one hell of a lot less words than you have, and with about as much useful information.
Friend, it's VERY obvious that despite coming on here and portraying yourself as relatively neutral to both involved parties, that you in fact have an agenda. It's plain to all with a brain and two eyes to read with.
You are easily spotted from miles away. You make your thread, and then rather than having a civil point-counterpoint discussion, you vehemently disagree with anyone who doesn't see things as you do.
As for your maintaining that you had a job on Wall Street and therefore are duly qualified to comment on the underground corruption.....that's tantamount to me saying I worked as a janitor on the ground floor of the World Trade Center from 1990-2001....and as a result, I can espouse finite details as to who was really behind the bombings.
Carry on with your BS....
I'll bite. Even though you seem completely emotional and irrational right now.
This is the 1st actual response you've given. A bit of a rant, but a response. As far as my vehement behavior, I find your response to be much more vehement than anything I've posted.
As far as being neutral to both parties, I am. We need police officers. Some are very good Americans who just want to help society. I've dated a police officer. He was a great guy. A very kind guy. However, even he would warn that not all of his co-workers were honest guys. When I had a cop try to trump up some false charges on me, he helped me know my rights and was glad my case was dismissed. He didn't just simply take the "side" of the cop.
In a nutshell, I'm not an unreasonable guy.
As far as the whole Wall Street thing you simply seem to be trying to use it to tear down me as a person rather than prove any point of your own. If you want to debate Wall Street practices, than lets debate Wall Street practices. What are you even arguing here? You don't have to work on Wall Street to understand the scandals that have been taking place. Just listen and do your research.
If you are given direction from an officer and disobey, what happens next is your fault.
If they don't get that and think they have the right to go beyond that they are idiots and that might also explain why they may not have current employment.
What I take issue is how some posters defend some forms of protest, but then condemn other forms of protest they don't agree with. An example that I think we could all agree we equally hate is the Westboro Protesters. They show up to several public and private events and preach nothing but hate, yet they aren't beaten or abused by the police.
Is it the protesters perception that some on here are so upset about or their message?
What I take issue is how some posters defend some forms of protest, but then condemn other forms of protest they don't agree with. An example that I think we could all agree we equally hate is the Westboro Protesters. They show up to several public and private events and preach nothing but hate, yet they aren't beaten or abused by the police.
Is it the protesters perception that some on here are so upset about or their message?
You really don't get it, do you? It's not totally about the "message",...it's about the lawlessness associated with the protests. The Occupiers may have had a message in the beginning, but that message has been lost and overshadowed by their criminal activities.
Although one may detest the Westboro protests, they have held thousands of protests without tossing projectiles and assaulting police. Some have been arrested for failure to follow police orders,....just like the Occupiers.
Presently, the only way Occupiers can get any press is by breaking the law, and consequently public support has dropped to an all-time low. No one takes the protesters seriously any more.
"In the United States today, we have the most unequal distribution of wealth and income since the 1920s. Today, the wealthiest 400 individuals own more wealth than the bottom half of America -- 150 million people.
Today, the six heirs to the Walmart fortune own as much wealth as the bottom 30 percent.
Today, the top 1 percent own 40 percent of all wealth, while the bottom 60 percent owns 2 percent.
Incredibly, the bottom 40 percent of all Americans own just 0.3 percent of the wealth of the country."
OMG! How dare people have wealth. That needs to be taken from them and redistributed to the people. Oh, wait, that sounds an awful lot like socialism. People worked hard for that money, or they worked hard to keep that money. Why should they be punished so that lazy, deadbeats can have more? If people want money, go work for it. Stop sitting around asking for handouts, protesting to have your student loans written off, and doing nothing for society.
You really don't get it, do you? It's not totally about the "message",...it's about the lawlessness associated with the protests. The Occupiers may have had a message in the beginning, but that message has been lost and overshadowed by their criminal activities.
Although one may detest the Westboro protests, they have held thousands of protests without tossing projectiles and assaulting police. Some have been arrested for failure to follow police orders,....just like the Occupiers.
Presently, the only way Occupiers can get any press is by breaking the law, and consequently public support has dropped to an all-time low. No one takes the protesters seriously any more.
Are you actually taking up for the Westboro Protestors?
I showed that there has been "lawlessness" associated with both sides. The protest were overwhelmingly peaceful with even politicians attending until the beatings and mass arrest (where protesters weren't allowed to disperse by the way) started taking place. They seem more of an intimidation factor than an attempt to allow the protesters to do so in a safe way.
The message has been the same, since the media has just blacked them out. Which isn't surprising since the very protests are against some of their executives and owners. That part you have to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
